Yovanka Torrente and Another v Grant Monaghan and Associates Incorporated

The respondent operated a medical orthotics, prosthetics and podiatry practice. The first appellant was employed by the respondent from 2017/2018 as an orthotist and prosthetist and was trained at substantial cost. Her contract contained confidentiality and restraint of trade clauses restricting her, for two years after termination, from competing, soliciting customers or employees, or using confidential information within Gauteng. Before resigning in December 2022, and while still employed, the appellant engaged with patients and referring doctors about opening her own competing practice, submitted medical aid claims under her own practice number for patients of the respondent, provided her personal contact details to patients, and informed staff and doctors of her new practice. After her resignation effective 20 January 2023, the respondent sought enforcement of the restraint. The Labour Court enforced a limited restraint for one year and within a 27 km radius. The appellants appealed against that enforcement.

The appeal against the enforcement of the restraint of trade was dismissed with costs. A related appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

The case confirms that patient and referral relationships in professional and medical practices can constitute protectable trade connections. It reinforces the fact-specific nature of restraint of trade enquiries and illustrates how courts should tailor restraints to be reasonable in duration and geographic scope to comply with public policy and section 22 of the Constitution.